Technology

More moderation is not always better


As companies develop ever more types of technology to find and remove content in different ways, there is an expectation that they must be used. Could you moderate means should to moderate. After all, once the tool is used, it is difficult to put it back in the box. But content moderation is now increasing, and collateral damage in its tracks is often overlooked.

There is a chance Now for some careful consideration about the path forward. Trump’s social media accounts and elections appear in the rearview mirror, which means content moderation is no longer A1’s consistent story. This may prove that the actual source of much of the concern was politics, not programmes. But there is – or should be – some anxiety lingering in the Great show of strength Shown by a few company executives in flipping a shutdown switch on the accounts of the free world leader.

The chaos of 2020 shattered any idea that there was a clear class of harmful “misinformation” that a few powerful people in Silicon Valley should eliminate, or that there was even a way to distinguish between health and politics. Last week, for example, Facebook reverse its policy It said it would no longer remove posts claiming that Covid-19 is man-made or man-made. Just a few months ago New York times He was martyred for believing in this.”baselesstheory as evidence that social media has contributed to an ongoing ‘reality crisis’. There has been a similar back and forth with Masks. Early in the epidemic, Facebook forbidden Advertisements for them on the site. This continued until June, when who finally She changed her directions To recommend the wearing of masks despite the advice of many experts to do so much earlier. The good news, I think, is was not effective In imposing the ban in the first place. (But at the time, this wasn’t seen as good news.)

As more emerges about the mistakes the authorities have made during the pandemic or cases where it is politics, not expertise, and tailored narratives, there will naturally be more doubts about trusting them or private platforms to decide when to close the conversation. Issuing public health guidelines for a moment is not the same as declaring the reasonable limits of debate.

Calls for more crackdowns have geopolitical costs, too. Authoritarian and repressive governments around the world have pointed to the rhetoric of liberal democracies in justifying their censorship. This is clearly a deceptive comparison. Silencing criticism of the government’s handling of a public health emergency, As does the Indian government, is a clear affront to freedom of expression as it happens. but there he is Some tension shouting on platforms to take down more Here But stop dropping so much over there. So far, Western governments have refused to address this matter. They have largely left platforms to fend for themselves in the global rise of digital authoritarianism. Platforms lose. Governments need to walk and chew gum on how they talk about platform regulation and freedom of expression if they want to defend the rights of many users beyond their borders.

There are other tradeoffs. Because moderation in content on a large scale will You won’t be perfect, the question is always which side of the line is wrong when applying the rules. Stricter rules and stricter enforcement necessarily mean more false positives: that is, the most valuable speech will be omitted. This problem is exacerbated by the increasing reliance on automated moderation for large-scale downloading of content: these tools frank and stupid. If the algorithms were asked to remove more content, they wouldn’t think twice about it. They cannot assess the context, distinguish between content that glorifies violence, or record evidence of human rights violations, for example. The outcome of this type of approach has been evident during the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in the past few weeks as Facebook has repeatedly removed Main content From and about the Palestinians. This is Not for once. maybe can Not They always indicate must and must—especially since we know that these mistakes tend to fall disproportionately already on marginalized And the vulnerable Communities.



Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button